On 24.12.2009, at 11:47, Amit Shah wrote: > On (Thu) Dec 24 2009 [11:26:00], Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> On 23.12.2009, at 20:52, Amit Shah wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> This series splits up the patches by functionality. Note, however, >>> that patches 2-6 introduce some functionality that's advertised to the >>> guest as having to work all at once or not at all. Also, the savevm >>> version is bumped only once but save/restore state is added in each of >>> the patches. They are split only for easier reviewability. >>> >>> There are a few differences from yesterday's posting: comments from >>> Markus have been addressed and also some issues that were pending have >>> been resolved. >>> >>> There's still a couple of fixmes: >>> - The vl.c bits aren't right yet (need to accomodate s390). >>> - Locking isn't perfect, a few extra locks are needed, but it doesn't >>> matter as long as qemu doesn't run it all separately (I've tested >>> with the kvm tree with -smp 2 as well and it runs fine). >> >> CC s390x-softmmu/s390-virtio-bus.o >> CC s390x-softmmu/s390-virtio.o >> /tmp/qemu/hw/s390-virtio.c:29:31: error: hw/virtio-console.h: No such file >> or directory >> make[1]: *** [s390-virtio.o] Error 1 >> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... >> make: *** [subdir-s390x-softmmu] Error 2 >> >> >> You should be able to at least compile test it for S390 with ./configure >> --target-list=s390x-softmmu. Linking should fail afterwards, but errors like >> this should be rather easy to spot that way :-) > > OK; after replacing that virtio-console.h with virtio-serial.h, it does > compile fine. Though there's a link error later for something else. > > So I guess it should work after this change.
That's exactly the change I did to make it compile. Alex
